Fell and Cook

[2007] FamCA 599

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FELL & COOK [2007] FamCA 599

FAMILY LAW – PRACTICE & PROCEDURE – Adjournments - Negotiated settlement for final alteration of property interests – adjournment to permit notification to be given to Australian Taxation Office

Family Law Act 1975

APPLICANT: Mr Fell

RESPONDENT: Ms Cook

FILE NUMBER: SYF 4247 of 2003

DATE DELIVERED: 13 June 2007

PLACE DELIVERED: Melbourne

JUDGMENT OF: Bennett J

HEARING DATE: 13 June 2007

REPRESENTATION

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT: No Appearance

SOLICITOR FOR THE APPLICANT: Forte Family Lawyers

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Ms W. Kayler-Thompson

SOLICITOR FOR THE RESPONDENT: Gadens Lawyers

Orders

1. That the further hearing of this matter be adjourned for mention before me on

   
   

   24 July 2007 at 9:30am.

2. That my reasons for judgment this day be transcribed and when transcribed a copy be sent to each of the parties.

IT IS NOTED INCONNECTION WITH THESE ORDERS that the judgment of the Honourable Justice Bennett delivered this day will for all publication and reporting purposes be referred to as Fell & Cook.

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA AT MELBOURNE

FILE NUMBER: SYF 4247 of 2003

MR FELL

Applicant

And

MS COOK

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(ex tempore)

1. The matter comes before me for mention.  The parties seek yet another adjournment.  The records of the court reveal that since I first became seized of this matter in December 2005, the matter has been adjourned on 12 occasions being:

   ·

   21 April 2006, 25 May 2006, 28 June 2006, 25 July 2006,

   
   

   14 September 2006, 14 November 2006, 4 December 2006,

   
   

   16 January 2007, 12 February 2007, 20 March 2007, 24 April 2007 and today.

2. The overwhelming majority of adjournments have been effected administratively without the parties or their practitioners being required to come to court.  The proceedings have been adjourned at the request of the parties and in the context of an ongoing audit by the Australian Taxation Office of a company which forms one of the significant assets of the parties relevant to these proceedings.  Ms Kayler-Thompson indicates today that the Australian Tax Office audit has been ongoing for approximately two years. 

3. I am advised that the parties have, as between themselves, agreed on what is an appropriate final alteration of property interests between them and that they are now about to provide notice to the Australian Taxation Office of the orders that they will seek be made in these proceedings. 

4. Notification to the Australian Tax Office at this stage seems to me to be an entirely appropriate course.  If the parties were not going to do it themselves,

   
   

   I would have required them to do it before any final orders were made. 

5. I will adjourn the matter to 9:30am on 24 July 2007 on the basis that the parties will be providing the Australian Taxation Office with details of that adjourned date.  If the matter is not ready to proceed by that date, then I invite the parties to contact my Associate and seek that the matter be further adjourned pending a response from the Australian Taxation Office. 

6. If, on the adjourned date, the parties will seek orders, by consent, which determine finally the alteration of property interests between them:-

   ●I assume that the parties will have given consideration to which (if any) of their corporate entities need be joined to the proceeding for the purpose of being bound by and giving effect to the orders they seek; and

   ●the parties will need to be able to satisfy me that the Australian Tax Office has been given notice of their application for final orders and the terms of those orders.  An appearance on behalf of the Australian Tax Office would, of course, put the notification issue beyond doubt.

7. If it transpires that the negotiated adjustment comes unstuck, the matter must be set on the path to a contested hearing and each set of practitioners are likely to be required to attend court. 

I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of the Honourable Justice Bennett

Associate: 

Date:  19 June 2007